netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>, Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next PATCH V1 9/9] net: frag remove readers-writer lock (hack)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 10:18:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121126091824.GB25197@breakpoint.cc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121123130847.18764.87682.stgit@dragon>

Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> wrote:
> After all the other patches, the rw_lock is now the contention point.
> 
> This is a quick hack, that remove the readers-writer lock, by
> disabling/breaking hash rebuilding.  Just to see how big the
> performance gain would be.
> 
>   2x10G size(4416) result: 6481+6764 = 13245 Mbit/s (gen: 7652+8077 Mbit/s)
> 
>   4x10G size(4416) result:(5610+6283+5735+5238)=22866 Mbit/s
>                      (gen: 6530+7860+5967+5238 =25595 Mbit/s)
> 
> And the results show, that its a big win. With 4x10G size(4416)
> before: 17923 Mbit/s -> now: 22866 Mbit/s increase 4943 Mbit/s.
> With 2x10G size(4416) before 10689 Mbit/s -> 13245 Mbit/s
> increase 2556 Mbit/s.
> 
> I'll work on a real solution for removing the rw_lock while still
> supporting hash rebuilding.  Suggestions and ideas are welcome.

<devils advocate>
Why not kill it altogether, and just set new secret_interval
without moving frag queues to new location?

The only consequence is that all fragments queued at the time of
changing secret_interval will be lost, and free'd by evictor/timer.

Default secret rebuild interval is 10 minutes, should we care about
small packet loss every 10 minutes?
</devils advocate>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-11-26  9:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-23 13:08 [RFC net-next PATCH V1 0/9] net: fragmentation performance scalability on NUMA/SMP systems Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-11-23 13:08 ` [RFC net-next PATCH V1 2/9] net: frag cache line adjust inet_frag_queue.net Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-11-23 13:08 ` [RFC net-next PATCH V1 4/9] net: frag helper functions for mem limit tracking Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-11-23 13:08 ` [RFC net-next PATCH V1 7/9] net: frag queue locking per hash bucket Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-11-27  9:07   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-11-27 15:00   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-11-23 13:08 ` [RFC net-next PATCH V1 8/9] net: increase frag queue hash size and cache-line Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-11-23 13:08 ` [RFC net-next PATCH V1 9/9] net: frag remove readers-writer lock (hack) Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-11-26  6:03   ` Stephen Hemminger
2012-11-26  9:18   ` Florian Westphal [this message]
     [not found] ` <20121123130806.18764.41854.stgit@dragon>
2012-11-23 19:58   ` [RFC net-next PATCH V1 1/9] net: frag evictor, avoid killing warm frag queues Florian Westphal
2012-11-24 11:36     ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-11-25  2:31 ` [RFC net-next PATCH V1 0/9] net: fragmentation performance scalability on NUMA/SMP systems Eric Dumazet
2012-11-25  8:53   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-11-25 16:11     ` Eric Dumazet
2012-11-26 14:42       ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2012-11-26 15:15         ` Eric Dumazet
2012-11-26 15:29           ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
     [not found] ` <20121123130826.18764.66507.stgit@dragon>
2012-11-26  2:54   ` [RFC net-next PATCH V1 5/9] net: frag per CPU mem limit and LRU list accounting Cong Wang

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20121126091824.GB25197@breakpoint.cc \
    --to=fw@strlen.de \
    --cc=amwang@redhat.com \
    --cc=brouer@redhat.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au \
    --cc=kaber@trash.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pablo@netfilter.org \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).